Musings and Sometimes Rants about the non-equal status of Fathers in Family Law and Parenting. Additionally periodic comparisons to the treatment of men compared to women in other areas including health care.

Monday, February 8, 2010

You have just got to read this NY Times Article on the gender imbalance at the university of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. A Victim oriented Feminist Prof can even make victims out of these women who out number men 57-43%. She posits "Women on gender-imbalanced campuses are paying a social price for success and, to a degree, are being victimized by men precisely because they have outperformed them, Professor Campbell said."

It never ceases to amaze me at the mentality of these people and how they ever got this far in life without help.

This has got to go into the annals as one of the most absurd statements and bending of the rules of logic in 2010.

I find it interesting that Jaffe still commands enough credence to get a call on his opinion of certain elements in social science. He is an ideologue perched in a secure position within academia who believes all men are abusers and women benign. This is the bald face of victim feminism. Yet, he is quoted for his so-called research, which only involves allegedly abused women, often in shelters, and he never delves into the Intimate Partner Violence perpetrated by the woman on the man in his published material. Is this not just propaganda supporting his belief system? For this, he gets kudos, awards, citations, and is apparently called to testify in court cases.

Pity any man who is involved in the case.

Mr. Makin proffers of Jaffe…"a professor at University of Western Ontario who specializes in child offenders and family violence."

This is overly generous. Jaffe, as stated above, is a women's advocate only not family and any violence that exists in his mind is that perpetrated by a man. He ignores the USA, Australian and some Canadian studies, which show the single mom to be the most likely perpetrator of harm and death to children. "It is a hot debate in the field - and that is not changing," he said. "I think there is a concern about this doing more harm than good."

Jaffe "thinks" but does not know. If he actually had any real knowledge, he would know the emotional harm to children if they are not removed from this form of Parental abuse and remedial action given.

Jaffe has opined, "…It's a step in the right direction, but I don't think anyone in their right mind would send a child to treatment based on that article."

Jaffe does one-sided studies as a matter of course that do not stand up to scrutiny of his peers when questioned on the type of subjects and the kind on interview process he supervises. Ask how he avoids female perpetrated IPV, female killing of children and female physical and emotional abuse of children. The only relevant information he wishes is that to support his preordained beliefs.

When asked to comment previously about Dr. Warshak's program he described it as "quackery." What is that saying about the pot calling the kettle black? In this case, the pot may not be knowledgeable enough to proffer an informed opinion let alone anything remotely approaching professional relevance. Could it be Jaffe sees his lucrative contracts helping to train judges, through the National Judicial Institute are in jeopardy?

Thank goodness, for professionals like Dr. Warshak who takes a non-gendered approach to his work. He wants to give children the tools to deal with a very broken and malicious parent.

The Honourable Justice John Gomery of Canada stated in 1991, "Hatred is not an emotion that comes naturally to a child. It has to be taught. A parent who would teach a child to hate the other parent represents a grave and persistent danger to the mental and emotional health of that child." What is Jaffe doing for the children by hiding from the truth?MJM

Controversial technique for treating alienated children seems to be gaining acceptance

As a pioneer of a controversial method of rewiring children whose emotions have been inflamed by an alienating parent, Richard Warshak grew used to being disparaged as a flakey deprogrammer.

He was nonetheless stung last year when there was widespread dismay in the wake of several Canadian judges ordering that alienated children - whose emotions toward one parent have been poisoned by the other - be forcibly taken to the United States to be treated by him.

However, the Texas psychologist now believes that much of the concern has melted away, giving him impetus to bring his Family Bridges therapy to Canada. Last week, Dr. Warshak helped train three Ontario psychologists in his techniques and held a closed-door educational session in Toronto with 130 judges who preside over family-law cases.

Both developments signal an end to the bad rap he has taken, said Dr. Warshak, author of a book on parental alienation - Divorce Poison. "I think there is demand," he said. "I sure get a lot of e-mails from parents in Canada asking about whether they can get their children into the program. I also get a lot of inquiries from psychologists asking to be trained in the techniques.

Dr. Warshak said that his talk to judges was warmly received. "I'm pleased that the judges are taking the time to learn about this," he said. "It was clear that these judges have seen these cases. Nearly every family court judge says they believe it is a real phenomenon."

The four-day sessions - which cost from $8,000 to $22,000 - involve videotaped presentations of family situations, discussions about alienation techniques parents use, and lots of down time to enable children to reacquaint themselves with an estranged parent.

Dr. Warshak said that what critics fail to see is that dramatic action is often essential to prevent an alienating parent from winning the exclusive affection of a child.

"The children we deal with are ones who have felt tremendous pressure to feel certain things, to see the world in a certain way," he said. "What we do is help them liberate themselves from that."

Dr. Warshak conceded that many children resist coming to his sessions, and have to be transported by police or private security officers.

"But once the child gets to us, they have a choice whether to stay or not," he said. "What they find is that it is an enjoyable experience. They feel tremendously relieved that they have now been able to get out of this box they are in."

He said that only one child refused to participate in the 23 sessions he has personally helped conduct. Eighteen children made tangible progress, Dr. Warshak said, while the remaining four "relapsed" after later coming under the influence of the alienating parent.

However, concern about the therapy has not gone away, said Peter Jaffe, a professor at University of Western Ontario who specializes in child offenders and family violence.

"It is a hot debate in the field - and that is not changing," he said. "I think there is a concern about this doing more harm than good."

Dr. Jaffe acknowledged a recent journal article in which Dr. Warshak chronicled the positive results he has achieved, but said it was flawed.

"The problem is, there is no comparison group," Dr. Jaffe said. "He is doing research on cases he has assessed himself. I think there is a major conflict of interest. It's a step in the right direction, but I don't think anyone in their right mind would send a child to treatment based on that article."

About Me

I am Politically active and right of centre on most issues with the odd exception such as legalization of "Mary Jane".
I advocate on changes to Family Law - an incredibly dysfunctional arena where parents are pitted against one another and children are the victims.
My picture will sometimes show me as a younger man simply because I like them.

Feminism On Trial Powered By Ringsurf

Counting 1 - 2 - 3

Leading causes of Injury to Women 2006

In 2006, unintentional falls were the leading cause of nonfatal injury among women of every age group, and rates generally increased with age. Women aged 65 years and older had the highest rate of injury due to unintentional falls (59.7 per 1,000 women), while slightly more than 19 per 1,000 women aged 18–34 and 35–44 years experienced fall-related injuries. Unintentional injuries sustained as motor vehicle occupants were the second leading cause of injury among 18- to 34-year-olds (18.7 per 1,000), while unintentional overexertion was the second leading cause of injury among women aged 35–44 and 45–64 years (13.7 and 9.3 per 1,000, respectively). Among women aged 65 years and older, being unintentionally struck by or against an object was the second leading cause of injury (5.7 per 1,000).

Injury related Emergency Department Visits

Unintentional and intentional injuries each represented a higher proportion of emergency department (ED) visits for men than women in 2005. Among women and men aged 18 years and older, unintentional injuries accounted for 19.9 and 27.5 percent of ED visits, respectively, while intentional injuries, or assault, represented 1.4 and 2.7 percent of visits, respectively. Among both women and men, unintentional injury accounted for a higher percentage of ED visits among those living in non-metropolitan areas, while adults living in metropolitan areas had a slightly higher percentage of ED visits due to intentional injury.